Once you go Wacom it's hard to go back. On the non-purely-illustration side (Illustrator or Flash), stuff like masking and painting gradients and effects all that, it makes a significant difference in your workflow. But one can do alright without.
its very time consuming without. each brush stroke has to be treated as a separate object almost (im talking about it photoshop). i would draw each brush stroke then selectively mask the stroke...possibly apply a filter or warp the stroke. just to make it look decent. now its much easier.
Ok so I've done the test a bit better this time. I made sure that I rebooted and had nothing running and I set the performance at maximum - same on both Mac and Windows versions.
This is on a Mac Mini Dual Core 1.66, 1GB Ram.
With 10.4.8 using a 5400 rpm internal drive scratch, I get: 5:10, 5:01
With 10.4.8 using a 7200 rpm FW400 drive scratch, I get: 4:37, 4:32
With Windows XP SP2 on the same machine with the 5400 internal, I get: 12:18, 11:49
wtf is wrong with the Windows version (or Windows itself perhaps)? It doesn't even show the image in the back when the thing is running. The whole image goes grey and white squares.
I couldn't test Windows with the external drive because it's HFS+.
Once you go Wacom it's hard to go back. On the non-purely-illustration side (Illustrator or Flash), stuff like masking and painting gradients and effects all that, it makes a significant difference in your workflow. But one can do alright without.
Quote:
Originally Posted by the Beatles
its very time consuming without. each brush stroke has to be treated as a separate object almost (im talking about it photoshop). i would draw each brush stroke then selectively mask the stroke...possibly apply a filter or warp the stroke. just to make it look decent. now its much easier.
If you can use it, I think it's getting very hard to justify going without. In the US, the basic Wacom tablet is $69 at Best Buy this week. Forget the pros, I think even an amateur artist should be able to justify that.
Comments
Once you go Wacom it's hard to go back. On the non-purely-illustration side (Illustrator or Flash), stuff like masking and painting gradients and effects all that, it makes a significant difference in your workflow. But one can do alright without.
its very time consuming without. each brush stroke has to be treated as a separate object almost (im talking about it photoshop). i would draw each brush stroke then selectively mask the stroke...possibly apply a filter or warp the stroke. just to make it look decent. now its much easier.
This is on a Mac Mini Dual Core 1.66, 1GB Ram.
With 10.4.8 using a 5400 rpm internal drive scratch, I get: 5:10, 5:01
With 10.4.8 using a 7200 rpm FW400 drive scratch, I get: 4:37, 4:32
With Windows XP SP2 on the same machine with the 5400 internal, I get: 12:18, 11:49
wtf is wrong with the Windows version (or Windows itself perhaps)? It doesn't even show the image in the back when the thing is running. The whole image goes grey and white squares.
I couldn't test Windows with the external drive because it's HFS+.
Once you go Wacom it's hard to go back. On the non-purely-illustration side (Illustrator or Flash), stuff like masking and painting gradients and effects all that, it makes a significant difference in your workflow. But one can do alright without.
its very time consuming without. each brush stroke has to be treated as a separate object almost (im talking about it photoshop). i would draw each brush stroke then selectively mask the stroke...possibly apply a filter or warp the stroke. just to make it look decent. now its much easier.
If you can use it, I think it's getting very hard to justify going without. In the US, the basic Wacom tablet is $69 at Best Buy this week. Forget the pros, I think even an amateur artist should be able to justify that.